He forgot to mention a fabled method known as the person repeatedly telling you to "calm down" once they realize you're about to make a really good point
@@BluDavidson While it is conceivable that your assertion holds a degree of validity, it becomes imperative to underscore that your perspective conspicuously neglects an extensive array of interdependent variables and multifaceted considerations, each of which necessitates meticulous dissection, exhaustive scrutiny, and iterative re-evaluation in order to even begin to substantiate a claim of this magnitude with any semblance of intellectual rigor or contextual accuracy.
@@atti_odysseyyou may claim this, but it’s simply not true. Any rational person with common send can see that his point, while not the only correct answer, is a strong card to play in any argument. You may use “big words” in an attempt to convolute the conversation, but that’s just a cowardly tactic that is only used when people can’t properly give their reasonings. You claim that his argument is without reason but can you say ^Why it’s without reason? Or what the proper reasoning even is? Even explaining this is pointless when the listener is as daft and clueless as you are. /jkily
Easiest way to win an argument is to steelman an argument. Find all the flaws in their argument, highlight them, fix them. THEN beat the superior argument. This does 2 things: first of all, it shows you know the argument better than they do. Second, it shows you are engaging honestly.
I see what you’re going for, but I think calling steelmanning the ‘easiest’ way to win an argument is misleading. Steelmanning requires deep knowledge, empathy, and time to analyze and strengthen someone else’s position-it’s honorable, but far from ‘easy.’ Also, while it might show you’re engaging honestly, many people aren’t equipped to appreciate that effort or might even feel attacked when their argument is reframed better than they presented it. Winning an argument isn’t just about logic-it’s about understanding emotional dynamics, biases, and the audience. Steelmanning is a great way to foster meaningful dialogue, but it’s not a universal strategy, and definitely not the simplest one to execute effectively.
@@NebulomX You are absolutely correct, but let's run with with the idea that steelmanning is the single most resource intensive method of debating a point, let alone winning the argument. It is more expensive, possibly the most expensive. But the reason you want to open with a steelman is that it is the single most complete and effective method of ending an argument. And thus the easiest. What is the most vexing part of an argument, if not their tendency to drag on? By bringing out the strongest and most good faith argument you have right from the start, you set it up that you either win the argument outright with only a few chasing questions after *or* your opposition are forced to move the goalpost or engage in some other technique to extend the debate. By opening with a steelman argument you have a full measure of who you are debating and for what reason. And in that capacity, it is the easiest way to win an argument. Your second point is also correct, but at the same time, if someone cannot recognize a superior version of their own argument, even when it is to their absolute advantage to accept the improved argument, that itself can be used to gauge as if continuing the debate would be fruitful at all. So, even if steelmanning fails, as you rightly believe it would for certain parties, it helps you get to your preferred win state faster. I am glad you agree that Steelmanning is useful. And again, I agree, it cannot hand you a free win in every argument - but opening with it is an excellent way of determining what kind of argument you are having, what your victory conditions are, and if the conversation is even worth pursuing beyond the initial thrust.
what makes you think so? is it not easy for everyone or is it your personalized response? does your past play a critical role in your construction of this opinion? is it applicable to all the videos about this topic?
@@Magus.2d In that situation, use a metaphore that is so incredibly simple that they would need to have room temperature iq not to get, I trust you can do it
@@Magus.2d The other guy's logic almost always 'feels' bs. And the other guy probably thinks your logic is bs. Understanding you oppononent is understanding why their logic actually isn't bs after all
I like using the socratic questioning, but in a genuine, honest way. When I argue with someone and believe they say something fake, I try to ask a question which's answer will highlight what is fake. Sometimes I get surprised by the answer that ends up being legit and I change my mind myself and "loose" the argument.
That is what Plato did. Not a joke. He was an Olympian wrestler. Plato was a nickname from his wrestling coach, meaning broad, referring to the size of his chest and shoulders. He would get into arguments and flex at his opponent while they were talking.
@@LeventKI can't think of lf any circumstances off the top of my head where "I'm older" would trump an actually good argument in anything a parent or child would be arguing about. Do you have any examples?
@I_Love_Learning basically things that you get better with experience, there is very little chance that someone older than you haven't gone through what you are going through. Especially if you're a teenager.
Its probably because this is a stickman with non professional way to showcase stuffs. Compare to those shiny and beautiful appeal of what you can find on the internet, the video looked like a joke so I used to not take this guy channel seriously at first.
I give credence to, Easy Actually in the state of being adequately appraised, and having the quiddity of existence, in of itself. fundamentally apraori; and it to take the proverbial other side is to sit in conceited sagacity.
@@Dragor33-rg7xjThat’s his content and that’s why he blew up so quickly. It’s original, funny and act good usefil information. He hasn’t been here on very long, his channel grew veeery quickly. It appeals to the modern generations.
So, basically, what you are implying is that the sum of two numbers is equal to the factorial of their sum. Then, by your logic, 2+2=4!= 24, 2+3=5!=120, and so on. This is clearly wrong. Hence, I have irrefutably proved that your argument is FALSE. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
@BlazingMeteor-w1b So basically, what you’re implying is that the sum of two numbers cannot be equal to the factorial of their sum. This is refuted by the fact that 1! = 1. Therefore, each of the infinitely many pairs of numbers satisfying the equation x + y = 1! must also satisfy the equation x + y = 1. This is only one of infinitely many sets within the set of sets satisfying x + y = (x + y)! There are infinitely many counter examples to your claim. Hence, I have irrefutably proved that your argument is false. HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA
I argue that the Earth is not a sphere, nor is it flat. It's actually a dodecahedron. It makes perfect sense when you think about it, the Earth's surface exhibits a variety of geological and topographical anomalies, including mountain ranges, plateaus, and deep ocean trenches, which align with the dodecahedron's twelve faces, each offering different terrains and elevations. Additionally, the Earth's magnetic field is far from uniform, showing anomalies and variations across it that can be explained by the dodecahedral shape, where magnetic flux lines naturally follow the edges and vertices of a dodecahedron. The distribution of climate zones and weather patterns across the planet can also be more comprehensively explained by a dodecahedral Earth. Different faces of the dodecahedron would experience distinct weather conditions, accounting for the diversity of climates observed on Earth. Furthermore, observations of solar and lunar patterns, including the patterns of day and night and the phases of the moon, offer additional support for this theory. The dodecahedral shape allows for a unique distribution of sunlight and shadows, affecting our daily experience and the lunar cycle. In addition to these factors, the alignment of tectonic plate boundaries presents another compelling piece of evidence. The Earth's crust is divided into plates, and the way they interact can be better explained by the dodecahedral model, with plate boundaries following the edges of the polyhedron. It is essential to acknowledge that the dodecahedral Earth theory is not merely a mathematical abstraction but is deeply rooted in empirical evidence. The enigmatic Bermuda Triangle, long associated with inexplicable disappearances and navigational disturbances, can be understood as a consequence of the Earth's dodecahedral nature, where the facets serve as conduits for unique energy phenomena. Furthermore, the phenomenon of ley lines, or the energetic pathways crisscrossing the Earth, is in perfect harmony with the dodecahedral geometry. These lines have been associated with heightened spiritual and paranormal activity, and their alignment with the Earth's vertices and edges lends additional credence to our theory. If you don't understand this you are delusional.
Opponent: *Unethical questioning* Me: I don't know. 🗿 Opponent: "See? Because ... so ... is true" Me: It doesn't relate. 🗿 Opponent: *Strawmanning*, *false flagging* Me: I never said that. 🗿 Opponent: "You're mad" Me: Yes I am. 🗿 Opponent: "I won, you lost" Me: Ok, and? 🗿
one time i found myself in an online argument because i said something very specific and important to the discussion and then someone else replied to my claim saying it wasn't true. i prefered to not reply back, their reply really felt like "the big words method" on my end and they also talked about a research but they didn't provide said research and at the same time i know of a research that backs my claim. as i said, i preferred to not reply back, but i still feel bad for it and for them
*I'm favoured only God knows how much I praise Him🎉👏,* $230k every 4weeks! | now have a big mansion and can now afford anything and also support God's work and the church.
Only God knows how much grateful i am. After so much struggles I now own a new house and my family is happy once again everything is finally falling into place!!
I started pretty low, though, $5000 thereabouts. The return came massive. Joey is in school doing well, telling me of new friends he's meeting in school. Thank you Evelyn Vera, you're a miracle.
Wow...I know her too she is a licensed broker and a FINRA agent she is popular in US and Canada she is really amazing woman with good skills and experience.
the Socrates Method is more indicative of points and interests. If someone's point is so opposite of yours, you can use questioning to find their underlying interests that align with their point. For example: if you want tacos and the other person wants sushi, asking them their reasoning might point you to their desire for light and healthier food, meaning you can come to an agreement on a salad bar or something as opposed to outright "proving" their point is wrong.
There is a big difference between an argument/fight and a discussion. In an argument both people don't want to be wrong so it's not effective to get your right even if they're wrong. In a discussion both people are open for the other person's opinion. Don't confuse the two and you'll get in much less heated arguments and enjoy life more
In my opinion. If one person in an argument is getting rlly mad & the other person is calm & seems to like be basically laughing at them then they win. This doesn't apply if both ppl are yelling at eachother
I would say that the first half of this video is right. Oftentimes it's better to just not argue as Dale Carnegie says. You cannot win an argument. The reason why is because in an argument they're not listening to you anyway that is trying to prove their point it's like you are. So you want to defuse the argument and turn it into a discussion. Arguing is a waste of time discussing is not. Also as Dale Kearney says if you're wrong admit it just like they did an example with the cookie. I have used these at times and I had worked. Unfortunately sometimes I do get my emotions involved and I don't think logically. But when I did do it this way it did work. Don't use logical fallacies. Or at least I wouldn't suggest it.
I want to emphasize the fact that public arguments are very different from private arguments. Even if your "opponent" is stubborn, non-stubborn people in the audience can change their minds. This is why I get into arguments with dumb people, so that the people who are willing to learn actually learn something, or to ensure that people don't get brainwashed by misinformation. Those kinds of arguments are common with flat-earthers, religious people, etc...
12:30 Often, it's better to reverse that structure: Evidence, Reasoning, Claim. That way your audience doesn't shut down when they hear a claim they don't like.
Depends on the instrument, your physical abilities, the level of proficiency you wish to achieve, and the time/money/effort you're willing to use in order to attain that level. Basically I'm really good at the cowbell
I usually try to be logical when it comes to answering the argument, But it is how the way you say it that makes it sound either rude or polite when you're trying to explain your opinion about this and that, So at the same time it's hard to say, Especially when I say something. Sometimes they think I'm angry even though I'm just calm when I'm typing
For some reason i just think i have seen the part "How to properly defuse an argument" in a book before, i don't know. It was "How to win friends and Influence people" or something like that
Hi, Just want to thank you for method number 4. I've been severely beaten up and now am at A+E emergency with broken jaw, and both legs broken :( It was over the last parking space in the supermarket.
i think this is the best channel on youtube like i dont think ive ever screamed how much i love someone's content as much as yours, make every second worth i spend on this channel
Download Opera here for free: opr.as/Opera-browser-easyactually
Congrats on the sponsor
Do one on "Math is easy, actually" Lol
Also "Powerscaling is easy, actually"
"Quantum mechanics is easy, actually"
Getting a sponsorship is easy, actually
WATCHING ON OPERA 🗣🗣🗣
@@easyactually I will
1. Be right.
2. Don't be wrong.
3. Don’t back down.
4. Stay away from stupid people.
i disagree
@@adityakhambeteIITlucky I just watched method 1
@realjoshuaW ok coward
He forgot to mention a fabled method known as the person repeatedly telling you to "calm down" once they realize you're about to make a really good point
Oh my god this is so true it hurts
@@TehSuperHerono it isnt
@@crispyybaconx Calm down.
In theory you are right. But in real life you are wrong
@@BluDavidson While it is conceivable that your assertion holds a degree of validity, it becomes imperative to underscore that your perspective conspicuously neglects an extensive array of interdependent variables and multifaceted considerations, each of which necessitates meticulous dissection, exhaustive scrutiny, and iterative re-evaluation in order to even begin to substantiate a claim of this magnitude with any semblance of intellectual rigor or contextual accuracy.
The "no you" tactic is undefeated
no its not
@shadow-crafter0 yes it is
@@HJRC_no it’s not
@@HJRC_ it’s literally not
@@HJRC_so basically you’re saying pressure washers should be outlawed?
the best argument is to just disagree without any explanation
no
I disagree
no it's not
this endeavor is intravenously erroneous, furthermore without fundament or comprehension.
@@atti_odysseyyou may claim this, but it’s simply not true. Any rational person with common send can see that his point, while not the only correct answer, is a strong card to play in any argument. You may use “big words” in an attempt to convolute the conversation, but that’s just a cowardly tactic that is only used when people can’t properly give their reasonings. You claim that his argument is without reason but can you say ^Why it’s without reason? Or what the proper reasoning even is? Even explaining this is pointless when the listener is as daft and clueless as you are. /jkily
Fun fact: if you use all 36 ways of arguing you have a near 100% chance of getting in a physical fight.
no u don't
@@aaryanjb1815 Ok you are right
So basically, you're saying the Nazis should have won the war? Aren't you ashamed?
I was going to comment something similar.
oh so you're saying black people will attack me if I try to have an argument
I never knew I needed a simulation of a discussion between Socrates and a stick figure over a jar of cookies.
Why did you need this?
hahahaha
Why?
1:15 is annoying when you actually want to learn something yet the other person thinks you’re arguing when you’re just confused.
Fiiiire... ooowl... :shrug:
Easiest way to win an argument is to steelman an argument. Find all the flaws in their argument, highlight them, fix them. THEN beat the superior argument. This does 2 things: first of all, it shows you know the argument better than they do. Second, it shows you are engaging honestly.
I see what you’re going for, but I think calling steelmanning the ‘easiest’ way to win an argument is misleading. Steelmanning requires deep knowledge, empathy, and time to analyze and strengthen someone else’s position-it’s honorable, but far from ‘easy.’
Also, while it might show you’re engaging honestly, many people aren’t equipped to appreciate that effort or might even feel attacked when their argument is reframed better than they presented it. Winning an argument isn’t just about logic-it’s about understanding emotional dynamics, biases, and the audience.
Steelmanning is a great way to foster meaningful dialogue, but it’s not a universal strategy, and definitely not the simplest one to execute effectively.
Holy cow you just got respectfully steelmanned
@@NebulomX You are absolutely correct, but let's run with with the idea that steelmanning is the single most resource intensive method of debating a point, let alone winning the argument. It is more expensive, possibly the most expensive. But the reason you want to open with a steelman is that it is the single most complete and effective method of ending an argument. And thus the easiest. What is the most vexing part of an argument, if not their tendency to drag on? By bringing out the strongest and most good faith argument you have right from the start, you set it up that you either win the argument outright with only a few chasing questions after *or* your opposition are forced to move the goalpost or engage in some other technique to extend the debate. By opening with a steelman argument you have a full measure of who you are debating and for what reason. And in that capacity, it is the easiest way to win an argument.
Your second point is also correct, but at the same time, if someone cannot recognize a superior version of their own argument, even when it is to their absolute advantage to accept the improved argument, that itself can be used to gauge as if continuing the debate would be fruitful at all. So, even if steelmanning fails, as you rightly believe it would for certain parties, it helps you get to your preferred win state faster.
I am glad you agree that Steelmanning is useful. And again, I agree, it cannot hand you a free win in every argument - but opening with it is an excellent way of determining what kind of argument you are having, what your victory conditions are, and if the conversation is even worth pursuing beyond the initial thrust.
@@NebulomX ok i agree now
So it's called steelmanning. TIL. Although I do it in reverse; breaking their strongest (value-wise) arguments first and then the weak ones later.
actually, it’s not easy
you're right haha
@@easyactuallyno u
@@easyactuallyImmediately applied lmao
(I ignored this comment)
what makes you think so?
is it not easy for everyone or is it your personalized response?
does your past play a critical role in your construction of this opinion?
is it applicable to all the videos about this topic?
To win an argument you must stop trying to win and rather understand your opponent.
I try that but It's really hard if the other guy's logic is bs
@@Magus.2d In that situation, use a metaphore that is so incredibly simple that they would need to have room temperature iq not to get, I trust you can do it
@@Magus.2d The other guy's logic almost always 'feels' bs. And the other guy probably thinks your logic is bs. Understanding you oppononent is understanding why their logic actually isn't bs after all
Yeah you’re probably right
Don't think thats true, man.
I like using the socratic questioning, but in a genuine, honest way. When I argue with someone and believe they say something fake, I try to ask a question which's answer will highlight what is fake. Sometimes I get surprised by the answer that ends up being legit and I change my mind myself and "loose" the argument.
Twitter must've read all those 36 ways
it's easy, actually
say they're wrong and *_refuse to elaborate._*
"I could explain why you're wrong but you simply lack the mental facilities to comprehend my reasoning"
You're wrong. It's hard.
Then the other person will think you're still wrong, so *they* actually won
@@aquapendulum youre right
Get punched speedrun
The fun bit with the "Not a factorial" comment on "1+1=2!" is that, even if it were a factorial, it'd still be correct.
I usually like to win arguments by flexing really hard and asserting my dominance via having larger biceps than my opponent
Plato?
Gigachad?
Absolutely valid
So can you show your bicep to proof your point or is your bicep just not real?
That is what Plato did.
Not a joke. He was an Olympian wrestler. Plato was a nickname from his wrestling coach, meaning broad, referring to the size of his chest and shoulders.
He would get into arguments and flex at his opponent while they were talking.
1. Attack attack attack
2. Deny all accusations
3. Even at your lowest point dont ever admit defeat
Me: Uses tactics to win argument
My mom: Im older
Me: damn
That actually is a valid argument in a lot of situations, it's just that sometimes your mom will use it incorrectly on purpose.
@@LeventKfound you here:)
@@LeventKI can't think of lf any circumstances off the top of my head where "I'm older" would trump an actually good argument in anything a parent or child would be arguing about. Do you have any examples?
@I_Love_Learning basically things that you get better with experience, there is very little chance that someone older than you haven't gone through what you are going through. Especially if you're a teenager.
@ I would argue that that isn't true per se, and as such would always be better if there was some other claim in-between. Thank you though!
Methods 1-3 are very underrated, I use them a lot of the time and I live happily
being a narcissist has never been so hard
Okay then. Ill win a argument against my father then
(Edit)
I won.
you fool he's already a master at using 4.)
If you can withstand his belt, you basically won
@suikinng4232 Now thats a real challange.
Your father is watching the same video
But is he really your father, if he‘s not listening to you?
I can’t believe I get the opportunity to be the first to say that this video is just a chapter out of How to Win Friends and Influence People!
Glad to know, Now I know I already have the knowledge this video offers.
Uhm, just read it. Just a few points but not all of them.
I actually disagree, because you are wrong.
@@sirdumpybearyes
@AmanMuhsin-p7s No
Dammit, now I want to pressure wash some cookies.
4:21 I laughed too hard on that one 😂
omg christina! i love your vids
this youtube page is very underrated, and one of the most original, entertaining, educational, channel, why aren't more people watching this man
no its not
Its probably because this is a stickman with non professional way to showcase stuffs. Compare to those shiny and beautiful appeal of what you can find on the internet, the video looked like a joke so I used to not take this guy channel seriously at first.
I agree
I give credence to, Easy Actually in the state of being adequately appraised, and having the quiddity of existence, in of itself. fundamentally apraori; and it to take the proverbial other side is to sit in conceited sagacity.
@@Dragor33-rg7xjThat’s his content and that’s why he blew up so quickly. It’s original, funny and act good usefil information. He hasn’t been here on very long, his channel grew veeery quickly. It appeals to the modern generations.
9:19 The Politician's Playbook...
1:30 erm.... well actually 2 factorial is just 2, so 1+1 does equal 2! actually.............
So, basically, what you are implying is that the sum of two numbers is equal to the factorial of their sum.
Then, by your logic, 2+2=4!= 24, 2+3=5!=120, and so on. This is clearly wrong. Hence, I have irrefutably proved that your argument is FALSE. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
@BlazingMeteor-w1b So basically, what you’re implying is that the sum of two numbers cannot be equal to the factorial of their sum. This is refuted by the fact that 1! = 1. Therefore, each of the infinitely many pairs of numbers satisfying the equation x + y = 1! must also satisfy the equation x + y = 1. This is only one of infinitely many sets within the set of sets satisfying x + y = (x + y)! There are infinitely many counter examples to your claim. Hence, I have irrefutably proved that your argument is false. HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA
@ You are WRONG
* Leaves without any further elaboration *
@BlazingMeteor-w1b Damn, you got me.
The last speal of intellectual phrasing was actually making my head hurt 😵
Haven't read many science papers lately, as nobody really talks like that in real life.
It kinda boils down to "semantic satiation," when you lose a sense of meaning about the word(s), pulling the carpet from under the whole discussion
so the last part is how to be an asshole 101
Yep, method number four made my lil bro get really mad
I argue that the Earth is not a sphere, nor is it flat. It's actually a dodecahedron. It makes perfect sense when you think about it, the Earth's surface exhibits a variety of geological and topographical anomalies, including mountain ranges, plateaus, and deep ocean trenches, which align with the dodecahedron's twelve faces, each offering different terrains and elevations. Additionally, the Earth's magnetic field is far from uniform, showing anomalies and variations across it that can be explained by the dodecahedral shape, where magnetic flux lines naturally follow the edges and vertices of a dodecahedron. The distribution of climate zones and weather patterns across the planet can also be more comprehensively explained by a dodecahedral Earth. Different faces of the dodecahedron would experience distinct weather conditions, accounting for the diversity of climates observed on Earth. Furthermore, observations of solar and lunar patterns, including the patterns of day and night and the phases of the moon, offer additional support for this theory. The dodecahedral shape allows for a unique distribution of sunlight and shadows, affecting our daily experience and the lunar cycle. In addition to these factors, the alignment of tectonic plate boundaries presents another compelling piece of evidence. The Earth's crust is divided into plates, and the way they interact can be better explained by the dodecahedral model, with plate boundaries following the edges of the polyhedron. It is essential to acknowledge that the dodecahedral Earth theory is not merely a mathematical abstraction but is deeply rooted in empirical evidence. The enigmatic Bermuda Triangle, long associated with inexplicable disappearances and navigational disturbances, can be understood as a consequence of the Earth's dodecahedral nature, where the facets serve as conduits for unique energy phenomena. Furthermore, the phenomenon of ley lines, or the energetic pathways crisscrossing the Earth, is in perfect harmony with the dodecahedral geometry. These lines have been associated with heightened spiritual and paranormal activity, and their alignment with the Earth's vertices and edges lends additional credence to our theory.
If you don't understand this you are delusional.
You're right haha
The "nuh uh" method is legendary
Hey that reminded me of jake peralta from b99
erm... nuh uh
Jordon Peterson at #24: WRITE THAT DOWN WRITE THAT DOWN
1:36 ironically those are the (only?) two numbers that the factorial wouldn't have affected the value of. 🤣
I was looking for this lol
0
@@312ingWasTaken 0! is 1 tho
If you extend to the gamma function, there would be tonnes of negative solutions
You should do a "achieving your new years resolutions is easy, actually"
he wont cause its not easy, actually (unless you plan to follow it for 2 days..i dont....)
The ending of this was gold. Practical examples for arguments are always fun lol
Secret technique: use “erm, actually” and force them to talk about how you said erm actually
☝🤓erm, actually, that works in theory but that would never work in real life
@LubinEnDevPersotechnically you used a slippery slope fallacy, try harder next time 😊
@@cruze_the so basically, your saying if we don’t know every fallacy and DONT use a fallacy in our sentences, we aren’t trying hard enough
@@Ryosilly fallacy fallacy + egg on your face
I can’t even be bothered to win an argument at all costs so I’ll just use the easy methods 😂
6:27 had me wheezing lmao
The speed at which I clicked on this is crazy
I highly recommend Counter Arguments series on how to change someone's mind based on the movie 12 Angry men.
It’s a good video
My favorite strategy to winning arguments is the classic "ooga booga and throw shit at your opponent", it's always so effective
The Second thing can only be done so many times before it stops working
Me: tries to win argument
Teacher: Respect teachers
Me: Goes back to youtube and scrolls
"So you're saying abusive teachers should be respected?"
i could listen to this guy talk about pressure washers for hours
Opponent: *Unethical questioning*
Me: I don't know. 🗿
Opponent: "See? Because ... so ... is true"
Me: It doesn't relate. 🗿
Opponent: *Strawmanning*, *false flagging*
Me: I never said that. 🗿
Opponent: "You're mad"
Me: Yes I am. 🗿
Opponent: "I won, you lost"
Me: Ok, and? 🗿
I'm pretty sure that I was just naturally born being able to win arguments.
I wamt to request being funny is easy actully
Philosophy teacher, I'm coming for you...
one time i found myself in an online argument because i said something very specific and important to the discussion and then someone else replied to my claim saying it wasn't true. i prefered to not reply back, their reply really felt like "the big words method" on my end and they also talked about a research but they didn't provide said research and at the same time i know of a research that backs my claim.
as i said, i preferred to not reply back, but i still feel bad for it and for them
BroI I hate #11 when they change subjects after being proven wrong.
I would rather create a joke with him as the premise and my words as the punchline
The easiest way to win an argument is to give up on the truth that you’re wrong and just go all out rhetorically.
What if they have a knife
Easy way to win an argument :
what does Google say ?
*I'm favoured only God knows how much I praise Him🎉👏,* $230k every 4weeks! | now have a big mansion and can now afford anything and also support God's work and the church.
Only God knows how much grateful i am. After so much struggles I now own a new house and my family is happy once again everything is finally falling into place!!
Wow that's huge, how do you make that much monthly?.. I have been looking for ways to be successful, please how??
It's Ms. Evelyn Vera doing, she's changed my life.
I started pretty low, though, $5000 thereabouts. The return came massive. Joey is in school doing well, telling me of new friends he's meeting in school. Thank you Evelyn Vera, you're a miracle.
Wow...I know her too she is a licensed broker and a FINRA agent she is popular in
US and Canada she is really amazing woman with good skills and experience.
the Socrates Method is more indicative of points and interests. If someone's point is so opposite of yours, you can use questioning to find their underlying interests that align with their point. For example: if you want tacos and the other person wants sushi, asking them their reasoning might point you to their desire for light and healthier food, meaning you can come to an agreement on a salad bar or something as opposed to outright "proving" their point is wrong.
7:20 LOL this is actually so funny though
10:58 "or their pets..." 💀🐈🐕
1:52 Got a google ad
Same...
There is a big difference between an argument/fight and a discussion.
In an argument both people don't want to be wrong so it's not effective to get your right even if they're wrong.
In a discussion both people are open for the other person's opinion. Don't confuse the two and you'll get in much less heated arguments and enjoy life more
Whenever someone thinks you're wrong, just recommend a book.
It was Mr. Miyagi who said "Best way to win argument - No be there!"
Testing products on animals is moral
Love your videos man ! Great content hope you keep this up 😄
i so agree, i lvoe being wholesome, and whenever im playing among us i go "you're right! i am the impostor! im so sorry!" (im not)
You know what's better than winning an argument? Not arguing at all.
Winning arguments looks like a terrible way to make new friends
In my opinion. If one person in an argument is getting rlly mad & the other person is calm & seems to like be basically laughing at them then they win. This doesn't apply if both ppl are yelling at eachother
i think bro may be just a tad bit obsessed with pressure washers💀
12:30 is definition of Jordan Peterson
You didn't have to summarise my Discord experience like that
I like using the good ol' days tactic:with duel at high noon
I would say that the first half of this video is right. Oftentimes it's better to just not argue as Dale Carnegie says. You cannot win an argument. The reason why is because in an argument they're not listening to you anyway that is trying to prove their point it's like you are. So you want to defuse the argument and turn it into a discussion. Arguing is a waste of time discussing is not.
Also as Dale Kearney says if you're wrong admit it just like they did an example with the cookie.
I have used these at times and I had worked.
Unfortunately sometimes I do get my emotions involved and I don't think logically. But when I did do it this way it did work.
Don't use logical fallacies. Or at least I wouldn't suggest it.
Beating insecurity is easy, actually.
The Socrates argument example is exactly how me and my dad argue. Expect instead of a cookie jar, it's about the dubbing of Squid Games.
I've played these games before🗣️🗣️‼️‼️
@@windws7137 GOD DAMN IT!
I want to emphasize the fact that public arguments are very different from private arguments. Even if your "opponent" is stubborn, non-stubborn people in the audience can change their minds. This is why I get into arguments with dumb people, so that the people who are willing to learn actually learn something, or to ensure that people don't get brainwashed by misinformation.
Those kinds of arguments are common with flat-earthers, religious people, etc...
I see
But those arguments are so BORING! I want to argue about how to build a fricking spaceship!
this just made me realize some things about myself
12:30 Often, it's better to reverse that structure: Evidence, Reasoning, Claim. That way your audience doesn't shut down when they hear a claim they don't like.
Learning an instrument is easy, actually 🔥
Depends on the instrument, your physical abilities, the level of proficiency you wish to achieve, and the time/money/effort you're willing to use in order to attain that level. Basically I'm really good at the cowbell
I usually try to be logical when it comes to answering the argument,
But it is how the way you say it that makes it sound either rude or polite when you're trying to explain your opinion about this and that,
So at the same time it's hard to say,
Especially when I say something. Sometimes they think I'm angry even though I'm just calm when I'm typing
Wow. That's very easy actually!
Btw, the ending about (a lot of) academic papers! XD
For some reason i just think i have seen the part "How to properly defuse an argument" in a book before, i don't know. It was "How to win friends and Influence people" or something like that
"Or something like that" lol so nonchalant about the fact you read things
@@legendarien1075 this was the joke lol
I like living in my own little bubble, thanks
Why?
I hate people like you
@@LeventK stepping out of my comfort zone is scawwyy :c
@@LeventKAll that exists is your bubble, now. You're the most important thing to you. Stuff like that idk
I recognize you had fun with the last one...
Proposition: It's not easy, actually
Discussion: What do you mean by "easy"?
As a who uses logical arguments I can confirm I’ve been hit with all the ways to win an argument😢
You should do a video on becoming a TH-camr is easy, actually
This is just one idea
Lets see if u like it
P.S - big fan of yours
yeah u can always trust skeptical regress
Hit them with the "so your telling me" and make them seem super dumb, makes them mad and gets your point across
I asked my brother 'what are your sources' he responds 'the internet.'
counter argument: no
no
#16 was diabolical
Taoism utilizes a lot of these ideas for defusing and avoiding these conflicts
How many people are Taoist ?
@@southcoastinventors6583 two or Three at least i say
well, that works in theory but that would never work in real life
Hi, Just want to thank you for method number 4.
I've been severely beaten up and now am at A+E emergency with broken jaw, and both legs broken :(
It was over the last parking space in the supermarket.
9:28 honestly i don't suggest this, it will just make the person infront of you lose his respect for you.
i think this is the best channel on youtube like i dont think ive ever screamed how much i love someone's content as much as yours, make every second worth i spend on this channel
I remember watching you when you had like 4 videos, congrats man
I'm gonna argue with a random stranger rn
No you're wrong, I will!
Forgot about the method of repeatedly mocking your opponents valid points with a silly voice until they give up
skip ad - 3:41
Thank you bro.
👍 thanks
Thanks